[Open-access] [open-science] Science Europe policy statement on the transition to Open Access

[Mike Taylor]

Agreed. It's better than what we might have expected, and that's
something we should celebrate and enjoy.

But let's keep thinking of six-month embargoes as what they are: a
step along the way to the only real acceptable destination of a
zero-embargo world.

-- Mike.




On 1 May 2013 20:03, Ross Mounce <ross.mounce at gmail.com> wrote:
> I see your point Mike.
>
> But in the context of the US OSTP policy, and many others allowing 12 months
> embargo, having another statement that says 6 months and NO MORE is plenty
> enough - I'd say *in that context* it's pleasing.
>
> Its going in the right direction towards: immediate open access (and nothing
> less)
>
> Ross
>
>
>
>
> On 1 May 2013 19:33, Mike Taylor <mike at indexdata.com> wrote:
>>
>> I agree that the Science Europe statement is mostly very good.
>>
>> But ...
>>
>> When did we get so habituated to publishers' entitlement that we now
>> CELEBRATE a six-month embargo as though it's a victory rather than an
>> outrage?
>>
>> There is no justification for ANY embargo, ever. It's time we started
>> getting noisy about that fact.
>>
>> -- Mike.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1 May 2013 18:51, Ross Mounce <ross.mounce at okfn.org> wrote:
>> > In case you haven't seen this on Twitter yet...
>> >
>> > Science Europe have released an excellent short, clear & agreeable
>> > policy
>> > statement on the transition to OA here:
>> > http://www.scienceeurope.org/downloads
>> > direct link to PDF:
>> >
>> > http://www.scienceeurope.org/uploads/Public%20documents%20and%20speeches/SE_OA_Pos_Statement.pdf
>> >
>> > I'm delighted they've backed the strong RCUK-like stance of allowing an
>> > embargo/delay of only 6 months for non-AHSS research.
>> > It also supports all good approaches to open access regardless of 'gold'
>> > or
>> > 'green' distinction, except in the case of the 'hybrid model' which it
>> > rightfully pours scorn on.
>> >
>> > (from the PDF below)
>> >
>> > The Science Europe Member Organisations have agreed on the following
>> > vision
>> > and principles:
>> >
>> > With regard to Open Access to research publications, Science Europe
>> > Member
>> > Organisations share the view that:
>> >
>> > • publication and dissemination of results are an integral part of the
>> > research process. The allocation of
>> > resources within the research system must take this into account;
>> > • Open Access to the published results of publicly-funded research will
>> > have
>> > huge value for the research
>> > community and will offer significant social and economic benefits to
>> > potential users in industry, charitable and
>> > public sectors, to individual professionals, and to the general public;
>> > • Open Access, as defined in the Berlin Declaration, is not only about
>> > the
>> > right of access, but also about the
>> > opportunity to re-use information with as few restrictions as possible,
>> > subject to proper attribution;
>> > • the common goal of Science Europe Members is to shift to a research
>> > publication system in which free
>> > access to research publications is guaranteed, and which avoids undue
>> > publication barriers. This involves a
>> > move towards Open Access, replacing the present subscription system with
>> > other publication models whilst
>> > redirecting and reorganising the current resources accordingly.
>> > Science Europe is committed to playing a role in accomplishing the
>> > transition to Open Access as quickly as
>> > possible, in an efficient and sustainable way, and thus avoiding
>> > unnecessary
>> > costs. This transition process
>> > must be as co-ordinated and transparent as possible.
>> >
>> > Therefore the Science Europe Member Organisations:
>> >
>> > • will continue to support any valid approaches to achieve Open Access,
>> > including those commonly referred
>> > to as the ‘green’ and ‘gold’ routes;
>> > • recognise repositories and related facilities as key strategic
>> > research
>> > infrastructure which should comply with
>> > high quality standards;
>> > • stress that research publications should either be published in an
>> > Open
>> > Access journal or be deposited as soon as possible in a repository, and
>> > made
>> > available in Open Access in all cases no later than six months
>> > following first publication. In Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences,
>> > the
>> > delay may need to be longer than six
>> > months but must be no more than 12 months;
>> > • require that as part of the publication services provided against the
>> > payment of Open Access publication
>> > fees, effective mechanisms are in place to ensure that the publication
>> > of
>> > research outputs is subject to rigorous
>> > quality assurance;
>> > • will co-ordinate efforts to ensure the efficient and cost effective
>> > use of
>> > public funds, and combine
>> > programmes for covering Open Access costs with budget control mechanisms
>> > and
>> > to build up monitoring
>> > systems for these costs;
>> > • accept that it is essential that Open Access transactions need to be
>> > managed efficiently, with the
>> > co-operation of all parties involved;
>> > • require that funding of Open Access publication fees is part of a
>> > transparent cost structure, incorporating a
>> > clear picture of publishers’ service costs;
>> > • expect publishers to apply institutional-, regional-, or country-based
>> > reductions in journal subscriptions, in
>> > line with increases in author- or institution-pays contributions;
>> > • stress that the hybrid model, as currently defined and implemented by
>> > publishers, is not a working and viable
>> > pathway to Open Access. Any model for transition to Open Access
>> > supported by
>> > Science Europe Member
>> > Organisations must prevent ‘double dipping’ and increase cost
>> > transparency;
>> > • recognise that some redirection and reorganisation of current budgets
>> > will
>> > be necessary. Governments
>> > should give due consideration to the fact that public funds for journal
>> > subscriptions often come from other
>> > ministries or institutions than those directly responsible for funding
>> > research; consequently, some rebalancing
>> > of budgets may be required.
>> >
>> > Science Europe wishes to encourage the European Commission, national
>> > governments, research
>> > funding and research performing organisations and other stakeholders
>> > across
>> > the world to adopt
>> > this approach to Open Access and to actively nurture collaboration in
>> > this
>> > area.
>> >
>> >
>> > Ross
>> >
>> > --
>> > Open Knowledge Foundation
>> > Community Coordinator, Open Science
>> > www.okfn.org
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > open-science mailing list
>> > open-science at lists.okfn.org
>> > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>> > Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>> >
>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> -/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-
> Ross Mounce
> PhD Student & Open Knowledge Foundation Panton Fellow
> Fossils, Phylogeny and Macroevolution Research Group
> University of Bath, 4 South Building, Lab 1.07
> http://about.me/rossmounce
> -/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-